The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Unfortunately, you did not attach the options for this question. Without the options, we do not what was not an advantage held by the Spaniards over the Native Mesoamerican people.
So the only thing that we can do for you is to answer based on our knowledge of this topic regarding the advantages that the Spaniards indeed had over the indigenous people.
The Spanish conquistadors had metal weapons, fire weapons, armors, and horses, that represented major advantages against the primitive weapons of civilizations such as the Aztecs.
Let's have in mind that in Mesoamerica there were no horses. It was the Europeans who brought horses to America. Natives such as the Aztecas have never seen a horse and they compare it to something similar they had seen before, a deer. Horses for the Spaniards represented an advantage in the purposes of conquest because horses can carry a heavy load and were used in battle.
And regarding fire weapons, native Indians could not compete against that powerful weapon.
Answer:
Because they were becoming too much of a threat.
Explanation:
Answer:
The Rwandan genocide, also known as the genocide against the Tutsi, occurred between 7 April and 15 July 1994 during the Rwandan Civil War.
Explanation:
The statement that best summarizes the goal of the Compromise of 1850 would be "<span>c. to preserve the Union by appeasing both sides on the slavery issue," since these were the tensions that would eventually lead to the outbreak of the Civil War. </span>
The correct answer is: "it violates the right to privacy".
The USA PATRIOT Act was enacted in 2001 as a reponse to the September 11 attacks and signed by President George Bush. The name of this act is actually an acronym which stands for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001"
The Patriot Act in its Tittle II confers increased powers to surveillance agencies and bodies dependent of the federal government. Its promoters argued it was a necessary measure to suceed on the war against terrorism. On the other hand, its detractors claimed that these provisions went against individual freedoms and basic civic rights.
